NHLPA’s latest proposal … and where it’s going

I wouldn’t get too excited about this until the owners react officially … and I doubt very much that they’re going to be dancing over the NHLPA’s proposal today.

Is it a big step toward an agreement? By comparison to the previous 65 days or so, yes, it is. Is it everything the owners want or need to get a deal done? No, it isn’t.

How the owners respond will tell how significant this proposal really is.

And remember this, if the owners dismiss this proposal out of hand, it will be as grim and gloomy a point in the lockout as we have seen.

As I’ve said all along, that’s when a deal will get done. When gloom and doom and the point of no return are upon us. That’s when negotiating will really begin in earnest … and if it doesn’t then, then there won’t be a season.

Who knows if it was the first time? I’d expect that all of these concepts would have been spoken about in the in-person meetings or at least in those conversations between S. Fehr and B. Daly.

What’s interesting though is that while the PA is proposing a 20% split but that starting in Year 2, their share as a $$$ figure can’t decline. So in that sense there would be a minimum Floor as well which I’m sure the small market owners will gag at.

Agree ilb. Perhaps one can be hopeful that they’re still meeting after two hours into the afternoon session but it seems to me that this is a proposal that can become the basis for final stage negotiations IF there are other owners engaged in the process and it isn’t Jacobs and the hardliners (sounds like a 50’s band) dictating the response.

I can’t see the Players going lower than 50 + MW payments in Year 1 either.

Today’s proposal is a 4-year MW proposal which if you assume its 50% plus the MW payments which allows them to go gradually down to 50% overall if you include the MW payments (50% + $182 million in MW payments in Year 1 equals 54% or so, etc.)

It’s actually a 4 year make whole provision, but it starts in year 2, Manny. They want to spread it over the next CBA, which they want 5 years. The shorter, the better for the players, considering their relatively short career. My guess is it’ll end up at 6 year with one year option

Put another way, if the pot is $3.3 billion, 50/50 equals $1.65 billion per side while 57/43 (last year’s split) would make it $1.881 and $1.419. In Year 1 of the players proposal, they would agree to 50/50 but from the owners $1.65 billion, they would have to pay MW so you end up moving back towards the players % being higher than 50%

ILB…saw on Twitter, the 2017-2018 season is the 100th for the NHL…you can be sure the Winter Classic will be held in Montreal…and the Owners definitely want the deal to extend beyond that season. I’d love to see a 6-year deal with an option for a 2-year extension.

Just don’t understand why we need to go through this public charade of NHL rejects out of hand, NHLPA’s proposal, hold dueling press conferences, nothing happens for a couple of days, B. Daly and S. Fehr likely talk privately about what can be built upon, and then they’ll be another stakeout in Toronto or New York mid-week next week.

Seems to me there is enough in the proposal for Bettman to go back to his 30 governors and solicit reaction/feedback and respond privately over the weekend…but only if Jacobs and The Hardliners allow Bettman to do so.

I don’t think the union would decertify because of not standing behind Fehr…the NFL players decertified by DeMaurice Smith still served as the lead negotiator. What decertification does do is allow groups of players to file lawsuits against the Owners claiming anti-trust infringement and not negotiating in good faith.

If a deal occurs before the lawsuits adjucate themselves, the players re-unionize and then ratify the deal (as happened in the NFL)

Owners obviously don’t see need to begin playing yet, players want to play, owners quick rejection and dragging this out will allow players to concede a bit more and more so that they extract a bit more pounds of flesh.

Not sure why it had to be this way but it appears that this is how it will be.

I was thumbing through a local (FL) newspaper sport page the other day, (May have been Orlando Sentinel )and some one had written that the NHL had agreed to suspend the coming season, and followed the announcement with the comment ” Do you suppose that anyone has noticed?” Cute.

The rhetoric may be negative, but when you look at how close they are compared to where they were a few weeks ago, plus the amount of items that are all but agreed then there is some hope this could be concluded in the next 1-2 weeks.

Who moves the most towards the other will depend on how badly (or how many) owners want to take what is on the table and get people back in their arenas OR how much resolve the players have for more missed paychecks. Bettman has only 30 constituents to silence (under threat of fines and removal draft picks) whereas Fehr has 700 with no way to penalise other than peer pressure. Advantage owners